District planners approve controversial ‘Jerusalem Burj,’ rebuff most objections
Deputy Mayor Havilio vows to keep up opposition, says planners have broken own rules on building height and don’t think about preserving character of capital
Sue Surkes is The Times of Israel's environment reporter
The Jerusalem District Planning Committee has approved the construction of a controversial tower nicknamed the “Jerusalem Burj,” rejecting nearly 200 objections.
However, it lowered the height of the tower from 193 meters to 165 meters (2,100 to 1,775 feet) by ordering lower ceilings.
To meet objections that the building would serve the wealthy and do nothing to ease the capital’s housing crisis, the committee also insisted that 20 percent of all apartments not exceed 55 square meters (600 square feet) in size and that eight of the 42 floors offer 50 housing units for long-term rental for 12 years.
The 42-story tower (equivalent to 66 stories if an average residential ceiling height of 2.5 meters, or eight feet, is used) will include 240 residential units, a hotel, and commercial and public spaces. The developer owns the so-called Epstein Compound, a seven-dunam (1.7-acre) plot on the ridge of a hill close to Alexander Caldwell’s iconic red sculpture “Homage to Jerusalem.”
On the western outskirts of Jerusalem, the site overlooks the Holocaust remembrance center Yad Vashem and the Mount Herzl military cemetery.
It has been nicknamed the Jerusalem Burj because of its height and the involvement of a US architect who, under a prior firm, had led the team that designed the Burj Khalifa in Dubai — the world’s tallest building.
In approving the plan, the committee said the project had “admirable architectural qualities” and was worthy of being on a light rail line. It explained that increasing population density along mass transit axes was a city and district policy, given the need to expand housing and infrastructure to keep up with population growth while not straying into green space.
The committee’s report further said that the structure fit its policy of allowing tall buildings along mountain ridges and was suitable for the “location, its spatial context, and the topographical conditions. ”
Responding to objections that the tower would block passersby’s view, it argued that the public would see more because the building would be thinner than the existing, wider, four-story structure.
Integrating a public building “for cultural uses,” a commercial area, an observation deck, and a descent to the forest will “contribute to the urban tissue and enrich it… raise the prestige of the neighborhood… raise the esthetic level of the environment and serve as a worthy example for other plans,” it said.
Addressing objections from Yad Labanim, a nationwide organization that memorializes fallen soldiers and supports their families, the committee said that other tall buildings (up to 30 stories) were already visible from the valley below and that more would be built. The tower itself could not be seen from the military cemetery, it went on, quoting the developer’s claim that it would symbolize the “power and strength of the Jewish nation.”
In its objection, Yad Labanim had written that the very idea of such a tower next to the cemetery where more than 2,800 of Israel’s fallen were buried was already causing “serious harm” to the sensitivities of the bereaved families and would be a mark of disrespect.
The committee also wrote that the core of the picturesque village of Ein Kerem was an aerial kilometer away and that the tower was not expected to harm it in any way.
The latter, home to several Christian institutions, attracts tourists of all kinds because of its old stone houses and winding alleyways.
Deputy Mayor Yossi Havilio, a frequent critic of municipal planning who ran unsuccessfully against incumbent Mayor Moshe Lion earlier this year, said he would appeal to the national planning committee and possibly the courts.
Echoing architects and others opposed to the tower, he said the problem was the lack of a city development plan. District planners had exceeded their own instructions to limit the height of buildings along light rail lines to 30 stories, he added.
“They don’t consider the importance of preserving the character of Jerusalem or the sensitivity of the location,” he said. “It’s inappropriate to build a huge, ostentatious tower that will dwarf and harm Yad Vashem and Mount Herzl.”
The most recent statutory plan, Plan 62, dates back to 1959. Plan 2000, from this millennium, was never legally approved.
Municipal sources explain that legal approval of a more up-to-date plan is too difficult, given the city’s complexity and the competing interests of its diverse communities.
They insist that broader factors are taken into account when considering planning applications.
